Be clearer about end of age changes

[Swagger]

The way prosperous stance was described in the age end changes was very lazy and unclear. Instead of saying it's almost identical to fort and letting us guess what was and wasn't changed, just tell us what it does.

There's no way one could assume that undead will get full acres but 1/5th the conversion hitting into prosperous. This was pretty clearly an oversight that bishop is trying to play off as a feature for some reason. There's no logical reason conversions should be reduced if gains aren't, and if it's intended, it should be expressed as such in age changes.

Please be more clear in future, as this effects a third of your player base.

[Selephant]

So looking to clarify, ops/spells going in and out of prosperous stance retain the -50% effectiveness of fortified stance?

[Korp]

The way prosperous stance was described in the age end changes was very lazy and unclear. Instead of saying it's almost identical to fort and letting us guess what was and wasn't changed, just tell us what it does.

There's no way one could assume that undead will get full acres but 1/5th the conversion hitting into prosperous. This was pretty clearly an oversight that bishop is trying to play off as a feature for some reason. There's no logical reason conversions should be reduced if gains aren't, and if it's intended, it should be expressed as such in age changes.

Please be more clear in future, as this effects a third of your player base.

What is the logical reasoning that conversion must follow the gains curve?

You ask them to be more clear then you throw in "This effects third of your player base" there is no logical reason for you to have that knowledge. :(

[Swagger]

A third of the player base is undead...

[Pillz]

What is the logical reasoning that conversion must follow the gains curve?

You ask them to be more clear then you throw in "This effects third of your player base" there is no logical reason for you to have that knowledge. :(

If they're going to disclose all the other effects of a stance, it makes sense to disclose that elite conversions are decreased hitting into it.

Bishops response about how they changed the gains penalties & name of Fortified is bull****:

Fortified Stance Removed - A new stance called "Prosperous" will replace it.

They left themselves an option to keep the elite conversions penalty, but it is still a bull**** omission. I also opposed the change to conversions hitting into/out of Fort when they were initially announced last age or the age before as well.

[Swagger]

What is the logical reasoning that conversion must follow the gains curve?

Because that's how it works in every other scenario and prosperous doesn't indicate there's a reduction.

What is the logic in there being reductions and not mentioning it?

[Pillz]

Because that's how it works in every other scenario and prosperous doesn't indicate there's a reduction.

What is the logic in there being reductions and not mentioning it?

Like I said, they left themselves the option by saying the major changes are the alterations in protections, without specifying the economic bonuses (implication being that prosp is just like fort with altered gains protections/penalties). I still think its bull**** to nerf conversions though.

[Korp]

But theres been a reduction in conversions hitting into fort previously. So if not specifically mentioned it should still stand. But idk. Its not like ZAWK Is famous of being clear. :)

[MasterShake2129]

But theres been a reduction in conversions hitting into fort previously. So if not specifically mentioned it should still stand. But idk. Its not like ZAWK Is famous of being clear. :)

They never stated that all of the changes to fort were being disclosed just that these were the major ones. (The main difference will be: Attacks into Prosperous will have no gains penalty; Attacks while your Kingdom is Prosperous will have reduced gains of -20% (instead of -50%) and scientists will gain experience during Prosperous.)

[Yadda9To5]

The devs make it very very hard to like this game, not so great changes sprinkled with surprises and last age live age changes. You can argue semantics all the way but when changes say "Attacks into Prosperous will have no gains penalty" and 1) undead conversion is tied to gains, and 2) for undead the bloody gains IS conversion, any reasonable person would read it as no conversion penalty. Ah well, it's abundantly clear utopia is some sort of wish fulfillment for the devs "oh looksie, we now own the game we play, we now have triple the fun by having double the power; we can play, we can admin, and we can change things to make it more fun, for us" That last part is a problem i perceive (could be just me, i hope it's just me, i really want to keep playing the game, but won't when things like this make me question myself why i bother), i'm sad the game isn't managed in a more hands-off kind of way, it feels the greater good is put aside for the little gains :/

[Bishop]

Yes we could have been clearer about conversions but we didn't state they would change, so why assume they would?

[Swagger]

Undead conversion rates are tied to gains. Prosperous has no gains protection. Logic dictates conversion rates would be normal.

There's nothing intuitive about knowing which formula overrides which when information isn't clearly distributed (and it wasn't even indicated one of the formulas still existed) . That's why I, and likely every other monarch made the assumption. I'm not sure how to make that any clearer to you.

[Bishop]

Undead conversion rates are tied to gains. Prosperous has no gains protection. Logic dictates conversion rates would be normal.

There's nothing intuitive about knowing which formula overrides which when information isn't clearly distributed (and it wasn't even indicated one of the formulas still existed) . That's why I, and likely every other monarch made the assumption. I'm not sure how to make that any clearer to you.

Converts aren't "tied" to gains, they are based off a similar but separate formula.

[MasterShake2129]

Are Ops into prosp also reduced at the fort rates?

[MasterShake2129]

Converts aren't "tied" to gains, they are based off a similar but separate formula.

Does this mean that the conversion rates slide down? meaning the first tick of Prosperous it is 100% of the normal conversion rate, 2nd tick is 98% etc?